U.S. to Designate Iran's Revolutionary Guard as Terrorists (Drudge Siren)

Drudge/WashPost ^

[furquhart]

The President, as Commander-in-Chief, is empowered to employ the Armed Forces wherever and whenever he sees fit, with or without the consent of the Congress. Moreover, I would point out that, under Public Law 107-40, any action against Iran could be justified.

Moreover, I would further point out that:

1) The Constitution did not specify the form that a declaration of war must take.

2) The authorization for the use of force, in lieu of a declaration of war, dates back to the first war against the Barbary Crusaders - under Thomas Jefferson, hardly known for his liberal attitude towards the strictures of the Constitution.

.
.

In any case, the world is at war. The Legions ought not wait upon the debates of irrelevant and useless old men.

[lesser_satan]

Better 25 years late than never, I guess.

[shield]

Oh boy....

[no-to-illegals]

A ‘Declaration of War’ is long past due. 323 sponsors in Congress for this action, may (repeat may) bring such a declaration. One (a declaration) is necessary....for Americans to back the effort. But the effort would have to be a ‘no holds barred’, bare knuckles type of affair.

Yet even with a Declaration of War, the demonrats would run in circles, yelling for iran to win. We have no right, the iranians are innocent, iran is a peaceful nation, iran this and iran that, Israel is to blame, it's Bush's fault...... one knows the mantra from the demonrats.

Once America won, say in about two days to two weeks, the demonrats would change their tune....only to yell and scream some more, we should not have done it....mpo

[Maelstorm]

There is writing on the wall. George W. Bush may be many things but one thing he is not is one who gives up the fight.

[hole_n_one]

To declare the military of a sovereign country as an enemy of the United States seems to me to be awfully close to a declaration of war.

I can't see how it could get much closer without an official declaration.

[Nephi]

Through your arbitrary interpretation of, “Congress shall have power to declare war” you render the constitution absolutely meaningless. Which is bad enough, but add to it that you probably have some misguided notion that you are “conservative” reveals you for the fool you are.

[steel_resolve]

damn straight, well said.

[this is my name not yours]

The President, as Commander-in-Chief, is empowered to employ the Armed Forces wherever and whenever he sees fit, with or without the consent of the Congress.

I respectfully disagree - the constitution is quite clear on this: Article 1, Section 8 gives Congress sole power to declare war. Article 2, Section 2 states: "The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States;". The key being "when called into service" i.e. by a Congressional Declaration.

Moreover, I would point out that, under Public Law 107-40, any action against Iran could be justified.

Public Law 107-40 section 2 reads: " (a) <> In General.--That the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons." In other words it applies only to those nations, organizations, etc. that carried out the 9/11 attacks. War against Iran would be awful hard to justify under this law unless you could link Iran to the 9/11 attacks.

Moreover, I would further point out that: 1) The Constitution did not specify the form that a declaration of war must take.

2) The authorization for the use of force, in lieu of a declaration of war, dates back to the first war against the Barbary Crusaders - under Thomas Jefferson, hardly known for his liberal attitude towards the strictures of the Constitution.

Agreed. But 107-40 won't cut it.

. . In any case, the world is at war. The Legions ought not wait upon the debates of irrelevant and useless old men.

Those "irrelevant and useless old men" are our elected representatives. The President is not an emperor who can dispatch troops around the world on his whim. He is head of the executive branch and as such he executes the laws passed by the people's representatives. It's that kind of "security at any price" thinking that will destroy this country faster than any enemy.

[jackibutterfly]

For your entertainment - I've collected a list of names for President Tom that you Freepers have created. Though I'd share them with you all:

A mad jihad

Achmedineajackoff

Achmedthewackjob

Adjimidad

Admadinnnerjacketdude

Ah Mad Jihad

Ahmadakaboob

Ahmadingdong

Ahmadinnerjacket

Ahmadoinjihad

Ahmagonnajihad

Ahmahjiddabug

Ahmamurderijad

Ahmanutjob

Ahmedeadman

Amininutjob

Ammagonnahaveajihad

Amahjob

Amajanutbags

Amidinenut

Aknutjob

AllMyJihad

Almondjihadi

Ahmedine-nazi

Ahmednutjob

I am a nutjob

Imadimwit

I-am-an-idiot

Iammadjohn

Ihamadinnerjacket

Imadingaling

I'madinnerjacket

Imahandjob

Im-A-Nutcase

I'minajihad

Mahmoud Adolfinejad

Mahmoud Ahmacrazyguy

Mamadude Imagonnajihad

Man boy Abnekiejag

Mymood Iminajihad

President Rat Face

President Tom

[this is my name not yours]

After thinking about it I want to revise my comments about the Barbary Crusaders. Yes, the first Barbary War was technically an undeclared war, though Congress did authorize naval hostilities. But the “victory” only lasted a few years. By 1812, the pirates were at it again. It wasn’t until the “properly declared” Second Barbary War of 1815, under President Madison that the Dey of Algiers was pounded into the sand. Yeah, it was right after the war of 1812 and Washington DC had just been burned by the British, but President Madison still saw fit seek a declaration of war from Congress (even though he could have gotten away with not doing so). That’s called taking the high road and it’s a sign of strength, not weakness.

[no-to-illegals]

Public Law 107-40 section 2 reads:
or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.

This portion may be the out.....or upcoming legislation may well define a complete and all out.....

But 107-40 (in General, I understand you paraphrased-correct?) won't cut it.

I can only state an opinion...the phrase, if as written (in General), in 107-40 appears
I did say 'appears' to give authorization, but with the new
legislation moving through both the House and Senate
107-40 may be made mute....my personal opinion is
iran is about to i ran out of time......
looks as though i ran is being told to back off or receive
i ran's due.....

323 sponsors in the House....speaks well
of the people's House.

[JasonC]

No, it just means banks can close their accounts. Which is a mild inconvenience to those in the west trading with them, that is about it.

[no-to-illegals]

I am now interested (more than ever) in the report coming in September before Congress. There may be something in the wind, these mullahs and their minions would finally understand. Regrettably, force is the only thing these mullahs and their minions do understand. It would keep sadr in his hole also.

The world loves to condemn America. So if America does take i ran down two notches, there would be nothing said, America has not heard before.

Only difference would be, the mullahs would no longer be in power, and sadr would possibly be running for his life, and that my FRiend would be a good thing....mpo

[this is my name not yours]

Don't get me wrong. I think Iran has blood all over their hands.

Part of the reason the libs have been able to make such political hay out of the Iraq conflict is because there wasn't a clearly stated declaration of war which stated what our reasons were and what our goal is. That left room for the libs to call it "Bush's War", it left room for them to define what our reason for going in was, or at least muddy the waters enough to leave the average Joe wondering, and it left room for the libs to define what the "end" should be (rather that setting a specific goal). I think that not getting a specific declaration of war against Iraq was one of the biggest mistakes of Bush's career. Justifying it under the penumbra of the 9/11 resolution left enough "wiggle room" for the libs to weasel some distance between them and Bush (the "it's Afghanistan, not Iraq" mantra).

Bush could have muscled a clearly written declaration of war against Iraq out of the Congress and most of the dems would have (grudgingly) voted for it. He would have been in a much better position politically as the Dems would have signed on board.

I just pray he doesn't make that mistake with Iran.

[Minutemen]

Sheesh! what took ‘em this long?

[ken21]

wouldn’t it be cheaper to have the iranian opposition

remove ahmadinejad?

[DCPatriot]

In the grand scheme of things, the best possible legacy President Bush could have would be to leave office with "Our Man" running Iran.

Figured if Baghdad took 38 days,

Tehran? 45 tops!

Anything else with a democrat admin possibly beginning in 2009 is, well suicide.

President Bush in the home stretch...and he's not through by a long shot.

[no-to-illegals]

After the General's 'Report' to Congress in September, all talk may be mute. I do not know this to be a fact, I am only speculating. I realize speculating is not proper, unless one is in the financial market, as this article does suggest, but as you said, iran does have blood on their hands and that blood is the blood of Americans, in the theater. Congress may be backed into a corner with the 'report', one can only wait and see.....mpo

[no-to-illegals]

I would give iran two days to two weeks in a bare knuckles brawl....I may be wrong, but I tend to think our military is holding their cards close to the chest....all jokers aside, and this one may be a King of Diamonds, as was stated on a previous thread.....on an unrelated topic.